Anant Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36202 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-497 Year-2025 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya ====================================================== Anant Kumar Son of Suresh Prasad Yadav @ Suresh Prasad R/O Vill.- Manjhauli, P.O.- Makhdumpur, P.S.- Tankuppa, District- Gaya, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhijeet Abhigyan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 02-06-2026 The Court proceeding is being conducted through virtual mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

3. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No. 497 of 2025 lodged on 10.07.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of C.J.M., Gaya.

4. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against the present petitioner and one unknown person. It has been alleged that one unknown person appeared in the BMT-III running test in place of petitioner and he was identified by the patrolling Magistrate. But, when he was sent for check up, then the said unknown accused fled away and being a Nodal Officer, the case has been lodged against the said unknown person and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36202 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026 2/2 against the petitioner on whose instance, the said unknown person has appeared.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence and the accused who was caught by the police there, fled away. He submits that the petitioner has unnecessarily been made accused in this case. He also submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon him.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it is the petitioner on whose instance, the said forged candidate has appeared by committing forgery against the system and it is the petitioner who is the beneficiary of the said fraud.

7. As such, in the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T